30 Gitmo detainees freed by U.S. District Court

While the debate as to whether or not five alleged terrorists should be tried in a New York Federal District Court rages on, little noticed has been given to the fact that dozens of Guantanamo Bay detainees have already been making their way through a Federal District Court in Washington DC.

As a result of a Supreme Court ruling that gave the Guantanamo Bay prisoners the right to challenge their incarceration via a Writ of Habeas Corpus, fifteen federal judges in a Washington DC court house have been busy giving the detainees their day in court, freeing 30 Gitmo prisoners to date.

Despite ex- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s assurances that Guantanamo held only the ‘worst of the worst’, the judges reviewing the cases have determined that there was insufficient evidence to hold the 30 detainees while refusing to free 8 detainees who remain incarcerated in Guantanamo.

For those who fear that classified information is being made available to the enemy as a result of these hearings – a concern being widely expressed by critics as a possible problem resulting from the upcoming KSM trial to be held in New York – the procedure for the hearings have been crafted to avoid any such breech of classified material.

Typically, the defendant is allowed to participate, if they so desire, by satellite hookup between the courtroom and Guantanamo. The first half hour of the hearings, where the charges are disclosed, are held in public. After that, the courtroom is sealed and only individuals who have passed rigorous government security clearances are permitted to be present. Further, the chambers of the 15 judges conducting the hearings are outfitted with safes, special laptop computers and printers so as to insure that no leaks are possible.

Among the many stories of those who have been released, due to insufficient evidence, is the case of Abdulrahim Abdul Razak Al Ginco (who goes by the surname ‘Janko’.)

In citing his reasoning for releasing Janko, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon pointed to evidence that the man had been tortured repeatedly by al-Qaida until he falsely confessed that he was a U.S. spy. After his confession had been accomplished, Janko was jailed for 18 months by the Taliban in Kandahar where he fell into the hands of U.S. forces and sent to Guantanamo.

“Notwithstanding these extraordinary intervening events, the government contends that Janko was still part of’ the Taliban and/or al-Qaida when he was taken into custody,” Leon wrote in ordering the detainee’s release. “Surely extreme treatment of that nature evinces a total evisceration of whatever relationship might have existed!”
Via Associated Press

The emphatic nature of Judge Leon’s comments is the result of the frustration the federal judges reviewing these cases are feeling as they discover the flimsy nature of the evidence that has resulted in many of the Guantanamo prisoners being detained.

While many pundits and conservative politicians are expressing concerns that Khalid Sheikh Mohammad might benefit from the American justice system to the point where he could find himself released on U.S. soil, this is not very likely to be the case-if we are to take heed of the example of the 30 freed detainees to date.

A Federal Court of Appeals panel has ruled that the district court judges lack the authority to order the freed detainees from being released into the United States, even if they have nowhere else to go. All of the released defendants have been repatriated to their countries of origin – with the exception of the now famous Chinese Ulghers, the innocent Chinese Muslims who were picked up in Afghanistan after fleeing persecution in China and tossed into Guantanamo Bay. Because of the threat these 17 Muslims faced in China, they have been placed in Bermuda and the Pacific Island of Palau where they have been living happily and peacefully.

While there is a distinction in bringing KSM and his fellow alleged co-conspirators to New York, rather than allowing them to participate via satellite from Guantanamo, it should be remembered that the cases referenced here have been hearings based on Habeas Corpus Writs – not full trials which permit defendants to participate in every aspect of trial at all steps of the proceedings.